Slashdot Mirror
Are You Man or Mouse?
fygment writes "... according to recent studies. It seems were more closely related to rodents than the carnivores i.e. the primates didn't evolve from the noble jungle cats, wolves, etc. Were closer to rats. Of course this has long been suspected in lawyers and SCO execs ..."
so watch your tounge when you are saying they are lawyers.. or even SCO execs.. you insensitive clod!
Of course this has long been suspected in lawyers and SCO execs ...
I believe you are having trouble telling the difference between rodents and dung beetles.
..but that doesn't explain why my tail is on the front side.
Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
The blurb from "fygment" must have been written by a mouse, as there's hardly a complete sentence in that jumble of incoherent fragments. I find this situation has become all too common on slashdot recently. If you can't be bothered to write a cohesive paragraph with complete sentences, then stop submitting to slashdot. You may not think it's important, but when you write things that will be read by a number of people it is essential. Use whatever style you want in email or IM but if you're going to submit something for public consumption you should take the time to learn how to use English, otherwise you just come off looking like a rambling idiot.
But we knew this all along after all the mice built this planet
"Mice are not, as is commonly assumed on Earth, small white squeaking animals who spend a lot of time being experimented on.
In fact, they are the protrusions into our dimension of hyper-intellegent pan-dimensional beings. These beings are in fact responsible for the creation of the Earth."
See the video here waning its real media
Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
> i.e. the primates didn't evolve from the noble jungle cats, wolves, etc.
And just who the hell ever thought they _had_? This is hardly news for anyone who went through public school in the U.S. in the last, oh, 25 years or so. This is analogous to saying, "It turns out the Moon isn't made of recycled condoms." Okay, I think we already knew that.
And what your proof against evolution?
And men.
What have men got to do with this?
Q.
Insert Signature Here
Perhaps this research will allow to make some adjustments to the tree. However, there are already interesting facts in the current version. For example, bats are closer to primates than most other mammals. On the other hand, armadillos must have branched very early, although they did it after opossums.
The mammalian line forks into one group that goes on to split into felines and canines, and another that further splits into rodents and primates.
Next this poster will post an article that says Birds are closer to reptiles than to humans. I'm no biologist but I can tell when someone tries to pass an encyclopaedia fact for a breakthrough news.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
In case you have no idea what the submission actually says (I must've read it ten times over before giving up), this is the one from the top of the article:
Summary: A pioneering study comparing the genes of 13 species has uncovered clues to how the vertebrate family tree might have evolved. One intriguing result is that primates, including humans, are closer to rodents than carnivores or cows and pigs. Many pieces of DNA that don't even code for proteins in all these species however are conserved, suggesting that even so-called 'junk' DNA may have an important role in biology.
So, I suppose this means the title of Steinbeck's book Of Mice and Men is redundant.
Tha part of the tree you refer to is unresolved , a polytomy.
What is important in a phylogenetic tree is branching order. When the branching order is uncertain or ambiguous, a polytomy is put in place. The placement of the branches in a polytomy are usually arbitrary, or in alphabetical order.
From the tree, you can tell that primates are most closely related to tree shrews, and that the group (primates + tree shrews) in turn is most closely related to bats and colugos.
> That is, of course, if you buy into the farce of evolution. I've never seen a generation so inclinced to believe a lie without proof. If you'd think for yourself, and not read the textbooks, you might realize that evolution isn't even an option.
Not read the textbooks? Sounds like "stay ignorant" is the key to your plan for understanding the universe.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Well, i guess you could argue that we are descended from mice, in that we are their creation (to find the ultimate question)
PS Unless I'm one of the inferior parts of this computer and didn't see it, I'm surprised there was no D.Adams reference before.
I, for one, welcome our new rodent overlords!
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
This is still the center of a heated debate. With modern genetic science we've determined that trolls lay somewhere between the rodent and the lawyer ( with SCO executives up next). Yet there's clearly still a large difference between rodents and trolls, and many scientists feel that the only way to settle the debate will be to find a half-rodent half-troll step. The deep jungles of Africa and Redmond, WA are focal points for this search currently.
One thing remains clear, your modern homosapien very clearly branches off from the modern SCO executive at the rodent.
As an owner of pet rats, one thing I've noticed is their sometimes disturbing similarities to humans in habit.
At one point, my two female rats were constantly squeeking and making noise at night. No problem, nocturnal animals, they're just more active in the dark. However, I also noticed that oftimes when I turned on the lights, that the rodents were "cleaning each other" in a position often labelled as a number just shy of seventy.
Now, at first I dismissed this, thinking that I was imagining things. However, after talking to several rat owners and a few petshops, I have garnered that this can indeed be more than simply a hygienic practice.
Afterwards, I'd throw things at the cage when they made too much noise to shut them up. At least until one morning after I found they'd dragged in the shirt I'd thrown and perforated it for nesting material. I liked that shirt too.
Now, I've got two new rats. They don't often exhibit the same behavior as the old ones, but sometimes they will. I'm considering breeding one of them (baby rodents being quite cute 'n all), and I wonder if this will change their behavior towards each other after the babies have grown (and one rat has had an encounter of the opposite sex as opposed to the same). And of course, if I got enough rats perhaps I could make some of this
Why people think that the core ideas of biology should be something you can accept or reject after a few minutes of armchair quarterback thought without so much as a textbook is beyond me. The arrogance is astounding.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"